Striking a balance between innovation and operational stability in your technology choices is often hard to do. Introduce innovative technologies too quickly into your digital ecosystem, and it can severely disrupt (and sometimes even break) your operations.
On the other hand, being too slow to introduce and implement innovations for the sake of stability can leave organizations stuck in legacy systems that don’t allow them to pivot swiftly enough in the direction of emerging trends and/or customer demand.
I would say the biggest (but by no means the only) factor to consider when trying to strike the ideal balance between the two would be risk, namely, risk identification and mitigation. What immediate risks do implementing a new software solution/platform or technology pose to current operational efficiencies within a larger systemic context? How can those risks be mitigated completely, and what ideal time frame would be required to do that?
From there, consider the potential risks that emerge as you gradually reduce this time frame, speeding up implementation and rollout times. What risks could cripple your organization’s operations, what would cause significant roadblocks, and what would simply rock the boat? Map out these risks by time frames, and it can be useful in helping you to pinpoint a “sweet spot” that makes room for both innovation and a secure level of operational stability when making technology choices and investments.
Of course, this is just a high-level suggestion because, at a base level, you’re always juggling risk when it comes to balancing technological innovation and operational stability. Other important factors besides risk include your larger organizational goals, resource allocation, and even internal resistance to change.
